Network Neutrality

One of Canada's best technology journalists, Jesse Brown, interviewed Techdirt.com editor Mike Masnick on the U.S. Stop Online Piracy Act. While I agree with most of the discussion, I want to challenge some of the conclusions made at the end of the interview. It was discussed how "big copyright" had a history of lobbying, while tech firms were part of a start-up culture and until recently didn't play that game. This was behind why "big copyright" has been so successful at pushing forward laws which break some of the best features of modern technology, while at the same time not helping copyright holders.

This is based on the idea that there is only one tech sector involved, and that "big copyright" are in control of this game rather than being pawns of a more powerful player.

When I noticed Mr. Saganash's tweet about his Huffington Post article, I replied to say that while I didn't agree with everything he wrote about Bill C-11, I was glad he noted the harm to creators and owners from TPMs. I suspect it would be worthwhile for me to unpack that comment.

In a reply to Mr. Saganash, Jason J Kee disagreed with the suggestion that most countries don't prohibit circumvention for non-infringing purposes. I believe this reply conflates two very different types of technological protection measures included in Bill C-11: use controls, and access controls.

OTTAWA – In the wake of a controversial proposal on net neutrality advanced by Google and Verizon in the United States, New Democrats are calling on the CRTC to lay down clear rules to ensure equality of access to all information on the Internet for all Canadians.

The primary issue that Google was bringing up was a simple and not politically hot one. Companies need to know that the government of countries they are trying to do business in will have laws and enforce them against those who attack the physical or virtual infrastructure of these businesses.

Many of the comments and articles about this incident suggested Google was trying to protect online free speech. I do not buy that argument in this case.

Liberal MP Marc Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie, critic for Industry, Science & Technology), has participated in a Q&A with SaveOutNet.ca. While the responses are interesting, I would like to compare with what would be said by Dan McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East, critic for Consular Affairs, Consumer Affairs) who has expressed quite different opinions on digital strategy issues. I wouldn't be surprised to hear McTeague supporting both 3-strikes and the Google Tax.

I took the form at http://localtvmatters.ca as well as the CRTC form and sent the following intervention. The topic was the connections between convergence and the future of television, including local television. (See also: Michael Geist)

CRTC DROPS THE BALL ON INTERNET FREEDOM: ANGUS
Decision leaves consumers and users out in the cold

OTTAWA - Today’s CRTC decision on internet traffic management practices is a blow to the future of digital innovation in Canada, New Democrat Digital Affairs Critic Charlie Angus says. The decision allows Bell and other giant Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to throttle the internet traffic of competitors or end users if they see fit to do so. This interference will be bad news for smaller competitors and leaves consumers open to digital snooping and interference from cable giants.